Wednesday, March 1, 2006

CE: Change Is Good.

I didn't want to jump in here, but since nobody else said it, I guess I will...

Thirtysomething,

This is the way I understand it: The Gedolei Hamisnagdim were great men, and I think your Emunas Chachomim can remain intact (at least as far as this case is concerned). The Debate between the Chassidim and Misnagdim was, as you pointed out, not really about a difference in theology, or halachic matters; rather, it was over a far more significant problem. Many Talmidei Hamaggid even state similarly, that the Misnagdim were not bad in any way – they were just not using the right tact, or the best approach, for the generation.

Perhaps we can use America in the 60's as an example: All the conventions and values of 1950's America were overturned and questioned by the 60's generation. Similarly, Chassidim turned main-stream Judaism on its head. At that point the culture of main-stream yiddishkeit, endorsed by the establishment, believed in Judaism that was the precise opposite of the Chassidic version, such as:

The establishment stressed somberness, the Chassidim stressed joy.

The establishment valued Torah knowledge and prowess, the Chassdidim valued perfection of the self and simplicity.

The establishment centered around the most scholarly, Chassidim centered around the most saintly.

The establishment recognized the mystical, but only for the elite, Chassidim promoted the mystical for the common man (this, of course, not long after the proliferation of the mystical during the Shabbtai Tzvi disaster).

(There are more, but these are the easy one that I come up with at the moment)

The Misnagdim represented the old-guard, and as all old-guards do, they were opposed to radical change. Had the Chassidim been peddling a difference of halacha or theology it was have been a much simpler problem – however the Chassidim were actively attempting to change all the prevalent values, culture, structure and emphasis of Judaism. It should be easy to see why that was considered intolerable by the establishment, for their beliefs and values were being rejected and attacked. The entire future of Judaism was at risk in their view. I think it is very understandable that the response required was the most extreme possible – and I think this was understood by the early Chassidim.

I also think this was why the Vilna Gaon refused to meet Chassidim, and should explain how falsehoods were accepted by Rabbonim, Batei-Denim, etc. It wasn’t about the specific charges, be they true or false, it was about maintaining conventional Judaism! These Chassidim were a shock to the system, and changing the traditions in a religion that lives by tradition – therefore, even though they could make a convincing case and win many a debate, it was unacceptable. The Gaon didn’t care what R’ Mendel Vitebsker and the Baal HaTanya would say; I’m sure that he knew that they were very knowledgeable and convincing, it’s just that in his opinion it was irrelevant. He believed that Yiddishkeit should remain as the mesora had been, and any revolution to the definition of the main-stream was – in his eyes – inherently unacceptable in the extreme.

I hope that I did a decent job of articulating what I’m trying to say here. I won’t get into any debates here with anyone about the merits of Chassidus, and I don’t intend to comment more on the matter. I just wanted to explain why I think Gedolei Torah can be respected, even though they supported what may be considered to be shocking activities.

I think Thirtysomething is Tzig hiding behind a dumb pseudonym.Tzig, did you kiss the Rebbe shlit's picture today?(for real, this 'mitzva' was on one of the homework sheets the kids come home from in Oholei 'Teyreh')What a sick cult that Tzig got stuck in as a foolish young lad, sucked in by professional missionaries. Now the 'dreck has hit the fan'and the heat is on Tzig to get real and leave. So instead of realizing that Lubavitch is the only chasides with totally insane garbage, he looks to find bad by others to be able to fool himself that Lubavitch is not that bad.'Nor a kozheh geyt tzirick' .He the 'kozheh' is following this.Wake up and stop foping yourself!

There is the Hegelian theory of Thesis; Antithesis: Synthesis, which I think applies well to the whole discussion. Hopefully it can be used in the formation of a more adaptive chabad in today's day and age.

Well said, CE, and I agree with your perception, except for one thing.

Since the Vilna Gaon signed the cherem against the Chassidim as antinomian (which his talmid muvhak Rav Chaim of Volozhin did not sign), he must have seen the alleged "error" of the Chassidim in a harsher light. He seems to have understod the Baal Shem Tov's "panentheism" as actual pantheism -- although the Nefesh HaChaim, who unlike the GRA espoused a form of tzimtzum shelo ke-pshuto, disagreed in this assessment.

Yet in fact there was no true machlokes in emunos ve-de'os, but a radical shift of emphasis and approach, as you stated so well.

One other thing I would add to your list: the Chassidim also represented a psychological shift, in that they relativised the primacy of rational intellect in the Misnagdishe values-system to reistate other sides of human nature: intution, emotion, and even sensation and physicality, seeking to elevate them to the religious plane.

This was implied by the rallying cry of the early Chassidim, "Be-khol deracheka da'ehu!"

CE is talking with more sechel on this inyan than Hirshel,so got to give him credit for that.Of course,he still keeps on repeating some tired old stereotypes about misnagdim.But,who knows,maybe someday he will realize that those need to be rethought too.People who look around and see the history of Chassidus see that it has not brought Moshiach,it has not created heaven on earth,there is much fighting among Chassidim themselves,now and through the generations,Chassidim go off the derech and more.The snag leaders were not so stupid when they felt that Chassidus was dangerous.Okay the snags aren't perfect either.Both sides should be honest and make a cheshbon hanefesh.Rav Chaim Volozhiner didn't sign the cheirem since he was not in Vilna or one of the other big kehillos involved, he was in a tiny village in another place.The cheirem wasn't a heter meah rabbonim which every Rav signed.His brother Reb Zelmele,who was bigger than him did sign it.The sefer Hagaon explains that.

Thanks for your insights! Yes, I pretty much agree. A couple questions though:

Isn't the Tzimtzum Kepshuto/Lo-Kepshuto issue an other one than the Gra-Chassidic disagreement? Did the GRA take this position against all Lo-Kepshutoists?

Also, I assume that Chabad Chassidus is included under the Chassidic umbrella, and it seems that the Baal HaTanya's approach towards the "relativism of primacy of rational intellect" is not the same as others. Perhaps it is more accurate to say "the added emphasis on other sides of human nature" - but not necessarily at the expense of the rational intellect?

I don't know that the GRA understood the tzimtzum she-lo he-pshuto shittah to be heretical; if he did, I can't imagine that the Nefesh HaChaim would have accepted it. This was also the view of the Mishnas Chassidim, a very influential earlier work that members of both camps quote (e.g. Likkutei Moharan I, 4). So you are right that this machlokes stands apart from that of the Chassidim-Misnagdim.

However, the shittah of tzimtzum she-lo kepshuto, although not exclusively the "property" of the talmidei Baal Shem Tov, does provide a metaphysical foundation for the saying that the RAYATZ ascribes to the Chassidim: "G-tt iz altz, un altz iz G-tt" (Likkutei Dibburim) -- a saying that itself could invite the very misunderstanding that flared up way back when. And I say this as a subscriber to the Chassidishe shittah (which is one of the few things I can afford to subscribe to, given the cost of living in Flatbush).

As for Chabad and the primacy of rational intellect as a cultural value, this is one of the things that set Chabad apart from other schools of thought among the talmidei ha-Maggid and later Chassidic trends. Yet even the old Chabadniks had a different ru'ach than their Litvishe landtsleit: more Chassidishe hislahavus, varmkeit, mysticism, and even earthiness, as the RAYATZ so movingly depicts; and as anyone who knew the old Russian Chassidim like Reb Mendel Futterfas, his brother Reb Hendel Lieberman, and Reb Berke Chein, etc., clearly saw.

In any case, I didn't mean to say that rational intellect was so severely downplayed; after all, you can't learn Gemora or Shulchan Oruch or even Chassidishe seforim without it! It just had to let some other parts of the soul sit at the head table, too.

Kudos to Alter for raisning the level discourse; I'll assume that's the reason most of the 'unwashed' have disappeared for the moment.

Regarding the machloikes on Tzimtzum, as I'm sure you are aware, the Rebbe points out in a letter the divergance of the N"H from his Rebbe and credits this to his having met with chassidim, although there are those who dispute this reading of N"H and reconcile him with the GR"A.

I would recognize R' Y.Y. Jacobson who theorized if this machloikes could not be the kernel of the battle played out between the Chassidim and Misnagdim; the peices fit but at best it works on a primordial level.

Most of those that signed did so, probably, because of their Bittul to the GR"A, except for those guided by a "higher" calling; those interested in preserving the status quo (i.e. the class system).

"People who look around and see the history of Chassidus see that it has not brought Moshiach,it has not created heaven on earth,there is much fighting among Chassidim themselves,now and through the generations,Chassidim go off the derech and more."

Zezmir-if that happened during the time when the conflict was going on strong,like in the life of Rav Chaim,that would be a big thing.Since it happened later,when the conflict died down and the cheirem had faded away,it's different.Hirshel-Hagaon is a great sefer even if you don't like it.I don't think you should call seforim rags.I know you're obsessed with snags and rag ryhmes with snag,but still,try to resist that temptation.It's already Adar,chill out a bissel!

Avreml: I have heard this remark about the cherem for years, but still don't know if it is true. However, it could be true, since Chabad and Breslov are just about the only large groups today that emphasize the original teachings of Chassidus (each with its own spin on things). Maybe Toldos Aharon / Toldos Avraham Yitzchok and Chernobyl / Skver / Rachmastrivke are being short-changed, though. They still keep some of the "old fires" burning, too.

Among smaller communities, the Stetchiner Chassidim on 54th St. seem to be pretty intensely involved in these limudim and darkhei ha-'avodah. And I knew some very Chassidishe Yidden when I davenned by the "Shvartze Slonimers" in Borough Park years ago. The Skolye Rebbe of 48th St is quite a boki in Chassidishe seforim, I'm told. And Reb Shraga Hagar, the young Kosover Rebbe, is really "flamm fier," with lots of original Chassidishe teachings. I'm sure there are many others, too. So things really aren't so simple.

Just to add one point. Chassidus was also a revival movement that sought to restore old values (like tefila baarichus) that got corrupted during the period of vaad arbo arotzeis (see letters of Tzamach Tzedek and the Alter Rebbe's interrigation for more details). This revival streak is often overlooked, but it explains the reason chassidim were not timid to introduce their “changes” and “innovations” – they were being machazir atoro leyeishnoh.

So it is not completely accurate to say chassidim thought that "Misnagdim were not bad in any way". Maybe not bad but certainly corrupt.

From what I remember - and ya'll better read the stuff for yourselves - it says that rabbonim in many places got their positions in a corrupt fashion (many simply "bought" their positions from local poritzim) and over the latter period of the vaad slowly corrupted dem gantzen yidishen "arum", di firungen, di hanocheis, dem kook af leben un af mentchen, uaz"v. The point: much of what was considered "authentic Judaism" circa 1750 was neither. Needless to say, Gedeilei hamenaggdim did not see the situation in the same light. As CE pointed out, they felt they were following the meseiroh and were not ready to hear “proofs from Talmud arucho” that said meseiroh got corrupted along the way...

I once discussed the Toldos Yaakov Yosef's critique of the rabbinic establishment of his day with the Pshemishler Rebbe, and he said that most of these points can be found in the writings of the GRA and his talmidim, as well as predecessors of the Chassidic movement. We tend to oversimplify "who's who," as if we were talking about a modern presidential campaign. I wonder if we can even say that the GRA himself was an "establishment" figure, given his extreme asceticism and reclusiveness, coupled with his numerous "non-establishment" views about mesorahs and girsa'os, and especially his alleged total focus on bringing the Ge'ulah, rivalled only by....

CE, I think my last comment clarified what I meant by the word "corrupt". But in case it did not - pervasive "corrupt" attitudes can & do "corrupt" even most sincere among the "ehrleche Yidden". That is what transpired. "You know that many misnagdim became Chassidim in time"Did you ever read the statements of people like Reb Hillel Paritcher about themselves prior to becoming chassidim?

AV,All correct about the GR"A - he was a strange dude. What I wrote before is in the above-mentioned letters of the Tzemach Tzedek and in the Alter Rebbe's interrogations.

Yes, I understood your clarification for corrupt (and I would say that by the same token, we live amid an extremely corrupt Yiddishkeit today - chassidim as well). And yes, you really got me with the comeback re: R' Hillel (u'kedomeh)... But I was speaking more in terms of their perception of things - just to say that from their standpoint they could be understood. One can make the wrong decision, but that doesn't mean they were bad people or not Gedolei Torah trying to fulfill their roles faithfully - many surely had best intentions.As for modern day misnagdim...

I must say, though, that it is very hard to divorce the GRA from the establishment, his unconventionality notwithstanding. He was, after all, the recognized authority of the Torah world at the time, and his word had more weight than anyone else among the "establishment."

Some people here seem to be mixed up.The GRA was on his own,he had his own small minyan,very few people davened there or followed his minhogim at that time.You people are also focusing too much on Lita.Limayseh Chassidus didn't start in Lita.There was corruption in Poland and Galitzia and Chassidus started and had it's big victories there.In Lita,alot less people became Chassidim.So maybe that tells us that the main corruption was not in Lita compared to Poland and Galitzia?Why don't you talk about the corruption in Poland and Galitzia, where Chassidus started?

Berl crown hightsYour foul speech proves any sane reader the point of the whole cherem, i cant even repeat the deragotary way you wrote about the Gra zt"l, i just know a mevazeh talmid chochom is chayev missah ,do you know what moridin vein maalin is? never mind its not in chitas so why bother.Anyways if you look at butmans writings its real bread and butter for us menagdim, he tries to show that the meshichistim are not insane, but rather are doing and beleiving as the rebbe himself said in his sichas, that proves our point of all the years, imagine really beleiving you are moshiach and waiting for the revelation, you got your army ready (tzivos hashem) the troops the parades but its just not happening, its called suffering from a "grandeur complex"

All lubavitchers believe in shituf (rebbe moshiach etc')or some other type of abizrayah deavodah zoroh, just some of them are closet meshichistim and others are in the open, read your history christianity started of the same way

anon, in my lexicon "a strange dude" is not a derogatory remark, but a compliment - akin to "unique & original". I would never use such language about someone I despise (like Shach YM"SH, for example). And it is misoh, not missa, you ignorant moron.

Why don't we just settle this whole debate ain mol far ale mol:The snags have perverted the Teiroh and Yiddishkeit itself. Baal-Shem-Teiv and his talmidim hichziru atoro leyeishno. The snags are still holding on to their corrupt ways (veeid heisifu chet al pesha) and have, therefore, no say in any matter of hashkofoh, hallocho, emmunos vedeyeis, yiras shomaim and ahavas Hashem. In short, they have no gedeilim, no chachomim, no talmideihem and no daas Teiroh. There is no point to debate them on any topic, even for da ma shetoshiv purpose.

Berl can write what he wants,but I think Hirshel and others are not secure in their Chassidish beliefs so they feel a need to bash snags-they know inside the snags POV can't be dismissed so easily as Berl says.The emes can't be ignored and wished away so easily.

Berl, what bothers you so much about Rav Shach that you used the ultimate Jewish curse when you mentioned his name,sans any honorific chas vesholom?Is it that he may have been right about Lubavitch all along,forseeing the meshichisten, the boreinuniks, veshar marin bishin.Dude,I feel your pain,there is nothing worse than realizing that your (perceived)soneh was right!

I have been reading, with great interest, this fascinating discussion. Everything I see here is heresay, so I would appreciate it if someone could show me where to collect the facts.Can someone please point me in the direction of some reliable source material so that I can see for myself what exactly you guys are talking about?

Honestly Berl, I think you may have pushed the envelope just a smidge too far there, but either way, I think you should use the title "Rav Shach." Shach without the Rav before it was one of the greatest halachists ever...

dovid, shach was really a tangential point and the honorific that followed his name was simply habitual, no specific message was intended. (but since you asked - lekayeim mah sheneemar "vesheim reshoim yirkav" or is it yirrokeiv?])

zezmir, what you wrote was scary (though I think everyone knew whom I meant). However, I resolve to b”n refer to him henceforth as "rav-sach" to avoid any possible confusion h'v vh'v.

Berl,Since you seem to take a stronger stance against the activities of the Misnagdim here (unless I'm mistaken), I am wondering how you deal with the issue. This discussion has helped my emunas chachomim, since at least I can now understand somewhat how so many (most) Jewish leaders supported the brutal activities against early chassidim.But since I think you arent as tolerant of those Misnagdim, does this not impact your emunas chachomim in any way?I mean if rov-rabbonim say something, and are flat out wrong ("corrupt") does Der Oibishter expect Klal Yisroel's emunas chachomim to remain intact?

Berl,That seems a bit illogical. If we take a non-partisan look at things there is no way to know which side is right, and Torah generally follows the majority dosen't it? The majority of recognized Torah leaders place a cherem on a minority. How is "amcha" supposed to know what to do? Amcha would generally follow the majority, and when the majority of Torah leadership takes a position like it did, don't you think that would impact emunas chachomim?

Quite unbelievable what happens to partisan subjective folk like Berl.Though everybody with an iota of sense in his brain realizes that the Lubavitcher Rebbe z'l erred in some things such as the moshiach campaign,where we have seen some sad results, he chooses to focus on non existent enemies.

thirtysomething, what exactly is a geder of a "recognized Torah leader" in halocho? When is this geder chal? What does the person in this geder have to do with emunas chachomim which is said – correct me if I am wrong on this – in reference to chaza"l? (And do not try the old dayan shebbeyomecho answer - it does not fit here).

The toldos book was burned by the gedolim of previous generations, due to the kefirah stated there that "einer vos davened shteit af a hechereh madreiga fun einer vos lernt"No wonder the Gaon Zt"l put them in cherem.But then again a guy like berl does not see anything wrong with that statement, how should he know of a mishna in nigle (peah) "vetalmud teirah keneged kulom"So there is no point in arguing this debate anymore, let the lubabs continue in their ways, they are nothing more then the closest thing to judiasm "close - but not the real thing" , running second is christianity, just let them go about their way and we will see where this new christianity chabad ends up in 50 years. And by the way if they do end up not going of the track and staying in line with the 13 ikrim and taryag mitzveis, remember you have to Thank Moron Harav Shach ZT"l for saving you guys and putting you guys back on the right track, the same way the baal hatanyah said we should thank the Gaon Zt"l for saving us from turning into another shabtai tzvi

i FIND IT QUITE IRONIC THAT THOSE who seem know exactly why and when Tzaddikim "erred" have no problem covering for their Tzaddikim's errors, they'll keep on saying that they were right for all those years of Sinah and Kinah to Chassidim...

Just look at the anonymous above statement about the Heiliger Toldes. After a statement like that, Amiratzish as it may be, is there any doubt that this guy, obviously educated in "prime" Lithuanian institutions, has no belief in Hashem, r"l?!

Tzig, don't act dense.Glick meant to ask you why anonymous' comment on the Toldos (horrible as it is)means he 'doesen't believe in Hashem' unless you believe in 'shituf' i.e the Toldos is part of the 'gdhead' and attacking the toldos = kefira.Got it?I'm not condoning the comment about the Toldos, I have no idea if he even says the quote attributed to him.Btw R'Shlomo Zalman Auerbach is descended from him iirc.Also do yourself a favour and lower your rhetoric since as blogmaster you are expected to be a bit better/mature than anonymous posters.I'm referring to your comment:'is there any doubt that this guy, obviously educated in "prime" Lithuanian institutions, has no belief in Hashem, r"l?! .You don't know the guy so stop jumping to conclusions about where he was or wasen't educated or whether he believes ....All this if you want to be taken seriously......if not just blog on...

you said:"Tzig, don't act dense.Glick meant to ask you why anonymous' comment on the Toldos (horrible as it is)means he 'doesen't believe in Hashem' unless you believe in 'shituf' i.e the Toldos is part of the 'gdhead' and attacking the toldos = kefira.Got it?"

I think the one considered the biggest Baki in this generation among the CHassidishe oilam is the Kopyshinizte Rebbe, his machon in Yerushalaim printed Reb Mendel RImanovers Seforim, Apte Rav, among many mnay others.

Get New Posts via Email (no internet required)

Has this blog changed your opinion of Lubavitch?

Subscribe To Blog

About Me

א יונגערמאן אין עולם הזה trying to do what's right. The purpose of this blog was to provide a counter opinion to the Chabad bashing that is so prevalent in blogosphere. I hope I've accomplished that objective. This is the blog for you if you have a decent knowledge of Jewish history and current events.